The New Canon Cinema EOS c300

Anyone else reading the liveblog of Canon's Hollywood event announcing their new Cinema camera? Looks pretty cool though no specs yet. The RED Scarlett announcement should be coming up any minute now, too. Big night for indie filmmaking!

ETA: Just noticed that the RED announcement will be a 6PM PST.
 
Last edited:
I thought the Canon was going to be much cheaper because last i heard (although a long time ago) the Scarlet was supposed to be around 6K. So i thought Canon was going to compete with that.

All that is old news i guess.
 
If it really only records 1080p, then I can't help but ask myself, "what was the point?" I'll just stick with a DSLR...

1080p is just a recording format, and doesn't really say anything about the image that is resolved. Issues with aliasing and moire aside, current DSLRs aren't resolving much more than 600 lines of resolution - Canon is claiming over 1000 with this new camera. So combine the higher true resolution with elimination of moire and aliasing, as well as minimized rolling shutter, plus what sounds like a significantly higher useable dynamic range and a better quality codec - and this looks to be a much better option for filmmakers than a DSLR if you are concerned about maximizing image quality.

Scarlet looks like a good option too - but be aware that despite the sub-$10k price for the body it's likely to cost just as much if not more than the Canon once you've put together a useable shooting package. Working with the footage in post will also require either much more hardware or much more time, so that needs to be factored into the overall equation.

In reality neither of these are particularly competitive with DSLRs because their prices put them into a much different target market. These are inexpensive alternatives to cameras like the Alexa or Epic - and I would expect the Canon especially to be popular in television production where the Alexa has currently been doing well.
 
I'm really curious how both cameras handle rolling shutter (and moire).
Canon claims the new CMOS performs a lot better than any DSLR.
Vertical resolution is said to be around 1000 lines (5D has around 700, Rebels are said to have around 500 lines).
(Fast CMOS readout is expensive, that could explain the pricetag... Phantom Flex deals with rolling shutter very well, but is very expensive as well ;) )

Scarlet has better codec and more resolution (and HDR!), but that also means your workflow will probably need an update (up to 400Mb/s per video stream). Also recording medium is more expensive per minute.

So I think one should incorporate such consequences in there calculations as well.

Anyway: I'll see the footage pop-up soon enough.
I'm not upgrading yet.
 
Interesting times for gearheads. The Scarlet sounds better on paper, but Red is notorious for not delivering on time and their low prices are deceiving because you need lots of add ons to have a working camera. Canon's price is higher, but you can pretty much guarantee that they will have a camera for sale on time. I see the Canon's main competitor as the Sony F3 which is already out in the world.

Scott
 
Exactly! The 4K sensor is not forgiving at all. You also need the best of the best lenses. Any imperfections show in 4K!

Any Canon L lens should do. My 5D MkII takes stills over 5000px across, and they look absolutely beautiful. In fact, at HD resolutions you'll be able to get away with much softer/cheaper lenses than you could if your final video was at cinema resolutions.

TL;DR: You can use cheaper lenses on the Canon C300 and get away with it.
 
Yeah, Canon L Glass should hold up at 4K . It handles up to 18mp (lot's of photographers complain about it at higher resolutions because it's not as sharp as Zeiss, etc) and 4K Full Frame video is a little over 12mp.

Cheaper glass, no no haha.

The C300 is a sweet camera no doubt. As far as C300 vs Scarlet, really depends on what you're doing. Shooting tons of footage for Broadcast tv or Web purposes and have to edit and turn around asap, C300 wins. It'll also more likely fail less in the field. RED is a lot harder to use. HDRx files are massive, and 4K is massive. But dang does it look good and give you tons of data to work with. If you have lot's of time on set and can do lot's of takes and have time to let your computer chew on footage, and especially if you're doing a theater release or 35mm transfer of the final product, the Scarlet is probably better.

No perfect camera out there. Pros & Cons with all. Shoot with what you like, suits your purposes and what you have access to!
 
Seeing is believing .. (That's what I say ;) )

When you scale an image down from 3000+px across to HD resolutions, that's going to kill those image artifacts dead. I was really hoping Canon would come out with a 5D MkIII that did this for their DSLR's because that would make the video from those things downright phenomenal. Right now their DSLR cameras don't have the computational power to do this (meaning it can't be done via hacked firmware) -- the only way would be to add a new chip that does it in hardware, and even if that were possible I lack the skills to do the reverse-engineering and do it myself.
 
When you scale an image down from 3000+px across to HD resolutions, that's going to kill those image artifacts dead. I was really hoping Canon would come out with a 5D MkIII that did this for their DSLR's because that would make the video from those things downright phenomenal..
There's a new filter out that effectively ends artifacts on te 5d. It's about $400, my friend has one and it works as advertised.
 
All of you Film Riot fans may have seen this already. But they do a nice, fun job of explaining things, as usual.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSgE0WYogng&feature=feedu


Stuff to pine for. But, still pie in the sky, too. I'm thinking DSLR's will remain attractive for us zero to mirco budget folks...unless maybe you live in an area where affordable rentals are available.
 
Last edited:
Top